Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

[jcanon701]

So i'm looking into getting MY FIRST DSLR camera. I've basically decided to get a Canon 400D which are about $650 with kit lenses.

However, I keep wondering whether or not I should just spend a little more for a better camera now. Would that be a good idea for a beginner? It's about a $300-500 dollar difference, which is money I could use for another lens for the 400D.

I would just be using it for general purposes.

So it's a toss up between a 30D or a 40D. The 30D would definitely fit my budget more. I know the 30D is better than the 400D despite being older. and the only reason I'm considering the 40D is the idea that it's the newer model.

Once again, this is for a beginner. I have been reading a lot about DSLR's though.

Feedback? Thanks.

[TheWengler]

If you're happy with the design of the XTi body then just get that. Use the rest of your budget to buy quality lenses.

[jcanon701]

would you recommend getting the canon 400d with the kit lens?

[jcanon701]

and is the grip really that small and uncomfortable/?

[fotogmarc]

Heavily recommended that you go to a store and try the cameras out.
The XTi is an excellent entry level Dslr as well as many other brands (Nikon D40x, Oly E-510, Pentax K10). If you want to stick with Canon (now and forever) then good lens investment is important. With a first time camera it'll take time and patience to realize the technical differences between the XTi and 40D. The price you feel right away.

Best of luck with whatever you go with.

[TheWengler]

would you recommend getting the canon 400d with the kit lens?

Do not buy the XTi w/o holding in a store first. It's impossible to make lens recommendations w/o knowing what type of shooting you'll be doing. This includes the subject matter and lighting conditions. Regardless of what you're shooting the kit lens isn't usually a very good option.

[jcanon701]

hmmm yea i've been getting mixed responses about the kit lens which is about an extra 100 dollars

some people say it's a good back up lens though and that it's decent for its price.

i still want a zoom lens though

i've looked at other zoom lenses to replace it with if i don't get the kit lens such as:

EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 - $515
EF 17-40mm f/4L - $650

Many people have said how EF-S lenses aren't good for long term though if i'm planning to upgrade, which i want to do but not anytime near the future.

What models are the EF-S lenses compatible with anyway? that'll help me determine based on possible upgrades later on...

what do you guys think?

[D Thompson]

hmmm yea i've been getting mixed responses about the kit lens which is about an extra 100 dollars

some people say it's a good back up lens though and that it's decent for its price.

i still want a zoom lens though

i've looked at other zoom lenses to replace it with if i don't get the kit lens such as:

EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 - $515
EF 17-40mm f/4L - $650

Many people have said how EF-S lenses aren't good for long term though if i'm planning to upgrade, which i want to do but not anytime near the future.

What models are the EF-S lenses compatible with anyway? that'll help me determine based on possible upgrades later on...

what do you guys think?

The kit lens is not that bad and can produce very nice shots. It has limitations, but is still capable. You might want to try it since you are just starting out and new to dslr's. There is a bit of a learning curve.

The kit is a zoom lens. What other zoom lens you need depends on what you want to shoot (wide to tele).

The efs lenses are designed for the APS-C (cropped) cameras, all 3 that you mentioned, and unless you are going to a full frame they are fine. They will not work on the 5D or the 1D series.

[TheWengler]

Zoom refers a lens that covers a range of focal lengths. You probably mean telephoto which refers to longer focal lengths. To replace the kit lens the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are good choices.

[jcanon701]

oo ic... yeah i think the kit lens would be good for me as a beginner to try things out

it's a good general purpose lens right?

i'm not in the budget to afford a replacement zoom lens at this very moment anyway

are there any other good general purpose lenses i can get? The one I've been hearing the most about are the canon 50mm lenses (though the canon 400d is cropped so everything will look bigger - is this a big problem?)

[TheWengler]

Well you aren't replacing the kit lens if you don't buy the kit lens. I don't really understand how you can afford the 40D but not the XTi with a $400 walk around lens. IMO the lens will have more effect on your images than your camera. Keep that in mind when you distribute your budget. The fact that the camera is cropped isn't a problem but you need to take it into account when you choose lenses. If you are more clear about what you'll be shooting it'll be easier to make a recommendation on lenses.

[coldrain]

A good standard zoom lens replacement for the kitlens will be the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC Macro.

The new and improved EF-S 18-55 with IS can also be an interesting option, for $200.

To have a standard lens, do not look at a 50mm. The Canon EF 35mm f2, or the Sigma 30mm f1.4 will fit that role perfectly.

The lenses are a bit more important than the camera body, for good results.
So if you have too low a budget to afford a camera with the right lenses for you, look at a cheaper body... you can and will upgrade the body in future. But the lenses will determine the outcome of the photos in the mean time.

[jcanon701]

i was talking to a guy at a camera store today and he said yes the kit lens is decent for it's price.

I want a good lens for general purpose shooting for now.

For general purpose and to replace the kit lens, he highly recommended the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens which does have Image Stabilization. It's about $500 dollars and I figured it'd be a better idea on putting in the $100 dollars I'd be spending on the kit lens into this better one to replace it. Is this a good idea?

The total price would be around $1000 dollars (rebel xti body + 17-85mm lens)
------------

Lastly, he was saying how I can get the new Canon EOS 40D and the 17-85mm lens as a package for $1600. I would save $200 dollars on that lens if I did it that way because the body of the 40D is already $1300.

But can someone seriously tell me what the REAL difference is between the 400D (Rebel xti) and the new 40D?

The deal sounds tempting because I'd be getting a better camera and a good price on the lens, BUT that's an extra $600 dollars that I could be using for ANOTHER lens if I got the 400D Rebel xti camera body.

Advice? thanks

[Rooz]

the 17-85IS is not a great lens in relation to its price. the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 is a better option. i'd even think that the 17-55IS kit lens is a better option purely based on bang for buck.

the 400d and 40d are incomparable. the 40d is a replacement for the 30d which is a cut above the rebel series. there are really too many differences to list, not least of which is the body design and feel, (including weight and size). i suggest you go thru their features yourself. dpreview.com has reviews of both cameras in substantial detail.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/

you can always buy a "better camera" so you need to be clear on what your final budget is, including what focal lengths you want. a 40d seriously limits your lens choices cos the body consumes your whole budget. and think to yourself do you really NEED a 40d for what you are shooting ?

[jcanon701]

hmm yeah i do not NEED a 40D.. not that's settled.

about the kit lens + replacement lens again.

the 17-85mm lens is not that good for its price yet better than the kit lens

17-55 kit lens is good for its price..

what to do?

[Rooz]

what to do ? to me its easy since you have the budget.

400d + sigma 18-50mm f2.8 Macro

for that you get a constant f2.8 lens throughout the whole range. one of the sharpest lens' around in that focal length and a macro feature to boot.